M Carling wrote:
>
> kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz) wrote:
> >I think it's more likely to see a trick like UA's ORD-HKG non-stop,
> >which is limited to only 260 pax to keep the weight down -- fly
> >a 747-500X SYD-LHR but don't sell all the seats. With a light
> >load, perhaps the -500X can do it.
>
> Since an empty 747-400 has flown LHR-SYD nonstop, clearly a 747-500X
> could fly the route with some pax. Perhaps enough to be profitable,
> perhaps not.
Aside from the technical side of whether any plane could fly LHR-SYD
(or LHR-MEL in my case) with more than a cricket ball, there would
also need to be some consideration of whether any of the sardines
would want to fly that distance non-stop. I've done that trip more
times than I care to count and to be quite honest I really welcome
having a single stopover of a couple of hours at Bangkok and Singapore,
to give me a chance to get out and walk around a bit.
Admittedly, one stop is better than two, but it doesn't necessarily
follow that non-stop is better again. Given the choice, this little
black duck would rather take a 23-hour flight with a two-hour stopover
(and fresh food too) than suffer a 21-hour `prison sentence' in a
sardine can.
Of course, if they built a plane that could fly 10% faster ...
Michael
--
Michael Page ---------------------- Mailto:map@hal.maths.monash.edu.au
Mathematics Department --------------- Phone/Fax: +61 3 9905 4486/3870
Monash University ---------------- ObMotto: Non carborundum illegitimi
Australia ----------------- ObURL: http://www.maths.monash.edu.au/~map